Guest [C]rOw Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 Case: Foxconn TLA-570A Monitor: 17" Envision CRT Monitor Motherboard: AOpen AK86-L/AK86-N ATX Motherboard Processer: AMD Athlon™ 64 3000+ 2GHz Processer with HyperTransport Technology Memory: Super Talent 512MB PC3200 184-Pin DDR DIMM Hard Drive: Samsung 40GB IDE 7200RPM Hard Drive Video/GFX Card: nVidia Geforce FX5200 TV/DVI Video/GFX Memory: 128MB Audio/Sound Card: Vinyl AC'97 Audio Mouse: Logitech Marble Mouse Keyboard: Microsoft Keyboard CD-ROM/CD-RW: Sony 52x CD-ROM Drive Floppy: 3 1/2 Inch 1.44MB Floppy Drive Sound/Audio Speakers: Labtec Speakers Screen Resoluction: 1200x900@60Hz Colors: 32-bit color Ethernet Card: Realtek RTL8169/8110 Family Gigabit Ethernet NIC TV Card: Hauppauge WinTV2000 BTW I have a D-Link 2.4GHz | 54mbps router and a Toshia modem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solarian Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 [sarcasm mode] Computer case and floppy might cause a problem. A Samsung hd? Oh horrors! And *gasps a CD-RW drive?! eek[/sarcasm mode] I don't advice to run the monitor on such a low frequency on such a high resolution. It's very bad for your eyes and face skin. p.s. You'll have only 16 or 24bit colours on Linux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arctic Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 i think the resolution only indicates the maximum resolution possible. from the hardware you have, i do not see any mayor problems with mandrake. you can test it nontheless with a mandrake-move cd first, if you want. but i think it will run perfectly on this kind of box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest [C]rOw Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 (edited) Ok, well I changed my resolution to 1024x768 @ 60Hz but the main parts I'm concerned about are the motherboard, video card, ethernet card, router, and modem. Edited January 1, 2005 by [C]rOw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
solarian Posted January 1, 2005 Report Share Posted January 1, 2005 (edited) 60hz is ancient! Even then you can usually turn the frequency higher on lower resolutions. I know this thing and it really is harmful for human tissue (eye or skin) to have such a low frequency a few centimetres from you. Even on 1024x Anyways I have a RealTek ethernet card myself, video card is fairly standart, the mobo's manufacturer sucks independent on the system used. Try it (as suggested) with MDK Move Edited January 1, 2005 by solarian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted January 2, 2005 Report Share Posted January 2, 2005 seems a bit unbalanced to me... Should run fine but AMD64 3000+ I'd prefer more memory....? (1GB) Like solarian says 60Hz is very low... regardless of all else it will give eye strain if used for a long time. Im typing this from a P-II-350 Mhz... with a aincient NVidia 32MB TNT graphics card on a el-cheapo monitor running 1024x768 @ 75Hz... This is a PC that was being thrown away ... so it seems strange you can only get 60Hz ? You will need to download and install the driver from the NVIDIA web site... to exploit the graphics card... You can't do much about the mobo but I don't see why it won't work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest [C]rOw Posted January 2, 2005 Report Share Posted January 2, 2005 (edited) Actually I can get 85Hz if I wanted to, I just used 60Hz. I'm on 1152x864 @ 75Hz now and everything looks just fine. Edited January 2, 2005 by [C]rOw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamw Posted January 2, 2005 Report Share Posted January 2, 2005 it's not a question of 'looks', it's a question of how your eyes feel about looking at it :). People's sensitivity to refresh rates varies, I'm extremely sensitive (I can tell the refresh rate of a monitor, below 85Hz, just by looking at it, and I get a headache using 60Hz for more than five minutes) but everyone's sensitive to some degree. Ever find you get a headache and feel a little tired if you look at your screen for a long period? Refresh rate has a lot to do with that. You really, really, really want it to be 85Hz at a minimum. BTW, 1152x864 on a 17" screen is mostly pointless. For any CRT monitor you can in fact work out the absolute maximum number of pixels it can properly render; just find out the dot pitch and divide it into the width of the monitor in inches. The result will be less than 1152, which means your monitor can't actually display all the 1152 pixels you're telling it to. This means everything will look just a little bit fuzzy. Use 1024x768 and everything will be a lot crisper. Optimum resolutions for most monitors are 800x600 at 15", 1024x768 at 17", 1152x864 or so at 19" (it's a bit of an in-between size, is 19") and 1600x1200 at 21". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest [C]rOw Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Ok, I'm using 1024x768 @ 85Hz now but anyways I tried MDK Move 2.0 and it works just fine on my system and my eyes feel just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aRTee Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Geez, the guy just asked if things would work... :P Anyway, welcome to the board and enjoy Linux, seems you're set to go! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted January 13, 2005 Report Share Posted January 13, 2005 Geez, the guy just asked if things would work...:P Anyway, welcome to the board and enjoy Linux, seems you're set to go! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, he got his reply, didn't he? Wecome! B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.